Canada legalises recreational cannabis use • Hacker News Board

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#301

Post by rtkwe » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 1:40 PM UTC

jeffdavis wrote: post #77

rtkwe wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good luck convincing the Supreme Court to upend the basis of a huge portion of federal law and decades of judicial precedence in favor of very broad readings of the enumerated powers.

How is that a broad reading? Under what reasonable interpretation of the Constitution does the federal government have the power to tell you not to grow plants on your own property for your own consumption?

No, I'm saying the court's reading of the enumerated powers has become very broad.

As for what interpretation, the one held by Robert Jackson and 4 other justices in the Wickard v Filburn case [1]. The justices' interpretations are the only one with legal weight after all.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#302

Post by rusk » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 1:42 PM UTC

Nasrudith wrote: post #292

rusk wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think many people right across the continent would probably have similar feelings. Many are "unhappy" with how the EU is presently being run but nobody would want to "leave". The confusion around Brexit emerges from just how poorly the referendum was run. It was a choice between "remain" which can only be a vote for the status quo (unsatisfactory for many) and "leave" which is open to so many interpretations as to…

Reminds me of all of the scapegoating of the EU for local policies and outright fiction like banana curve standards. Ironically the actual things to object to the EU about like their godawful internet policy proposals aren't on the radar. Anyway UK has parliamentary supremacy so a constitution would be empty words without changing that. I would say that the policy seems very dangerous but constituions are messy in te…

Imagine if nasty old bits like not allowing Jews to inherit property got embedded

Seems like a strawman, but I guess if that were the case it would have been amended out years ago ...

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#303

Post by rusk » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 1:43 PM UTC

flukus wrote: post #273

rusk wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think many people right across the continent would probably have similar feelings. Many are "unhappy" with how the EU is presently being run but nobody would want to "leave". The confusion around Brexit emerges from just how poorly the referendum was run. It was a choice between "remain" which can only be a vote for the status quo (unsatisfactory for many) and "leave" which is open to so many interpretations as to…

I thought this was because Britain didn't have a constitution as such so the don't have actual referendums? > An actual binding referendum against a written constitution would have to provide actual wording; rather than just a single word. I don't disagree for any philosophical reason, but this is very easy to abuse for anyone that favors the status quo. The most notable example I can think of is the republic referen…

No easier than a false “remain” “leave” dichotomy ...

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#304

Post by mirhagk » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 1:45 PM UTC

bitL wrote: post #160

toomanybeersies wrote: post #73

Meanwhile in Britain, the former leader of the Conservative Party, William Hague, spoke out and claimed that the war on cannabis had been "irreversibly lost". He was quickly shut down by Theresa May, who categorically ruled out legalisation or even decriminalisation [1]. I don't understand how politicians can stand up and claim that legalisation would have substantial negatives, when every experiment with legalisatio…

We already have many problems caused by alcohol and cigarettes, costing taxpayers billions in unnecessary expenses. I get it, people need to escape reality they live in. We know that some weed smokers end up schizophrenic and that in general smoking weed weakens one's will, so in many cases we end up with grown up children going only after the things attainable by easiest efforts. There are also some legit medical us…

I do believe we need to discourage hard drug use, but criminalization simply isn't doing that.

You mention cigarettes, and cigarette usage has actually been dropping pretty dramatically over the last few decades. This is because instead of prohibition (like was tried and failed with alcohol) the government took the approach of educating people and creating social pressures to get people to stop.

The same could absolutely be done with heroin et al. Create places where people can legally buy and consume heroin (under the supervision of nurses) and all the while advertise how terrible it is and offer addiction counselling etc.

The problem is that such a system would have to be run with the explicit goal of getting people to stop and the US's fondness for running everything privately would be disastrous in this case.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#305

Post by V-2 » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 1:47 PM UTC

omnimus wrote: post #155

Swizec wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on where. In a lot of Europe (and afaik also Canada) alcohol purchasing times are heavily regulated to combat binge, especially youth, drinking. For example no alcohol sales past 9pm, no sales before 10am etc. And you can’t advertise drinking. You can promote brands, but not drinking directly. Which is weird and I don’t know how the line is defined, but it exists in at least some countries I’ve been to.

Well "a lot of Europe" really means Scandinavia. To be precise it is only Norway, Finland and Sweden where alcohol is sold only by one brand of state owned shops. As far as i know you can drink whatever you want, when you want after you are 18. Notable exception is Germany where from 16 you can drink undistilled drinks like beer and wine. Oh we had lot of fun when i was 16 on our school trip to Germany. Good times. A…

> About advertising i think it applies again to Scandinavia.

Poland, too, with the exception of beer (and this is still subject to many restrictions).

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#306

Post by Nasrudith » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 1:48 PM UTC

foolfoolz wrote: post #135

toomanybeersies wrote: post #73

Meanwhile in Britain, the former leader of the Conservative Party, William Hague, spoke out and claimed that the war on cannabis had been "irreversibly lost". He was quickly shut down by Theresa May, who categorically ruled out legalisation or even decriminalisation [1]. I don't understand how politicians can stand up and claim that legalisation would have substantial negatives, when every experiment with legalisatio…

> Obviously we want to restrict access as much as possible to particular drugs, such as heroin or methamphetamine, which are so harmful and addictive that nobody should be using them, or GHB, where the potential for fatal overdose is so high. I dont understand this part. The potential for overdose on alcohol is high as well. I can go buy a plastic handle for $10 and if i drink the whole thing tonight i'll probably di…

Related I think some of the risk factor is vector related along with bodily reactions. Drinking too much leads to vomitting - while in the wrong circumstance potentially lethal it is expelled. One can't sneeze out cocaine or shoot heroin out of your veins autonomously if the body had too much.

Dose standardization does clearly help judging by the nasty side effects of overdosd deaths spiking after pill mills were shut down. It is not a panacea however - tolerance varies as well. It is why trying to get clean can be ironically dangerous. Things start going south and they try their old "standard dose" again after losing tolerance when it is enough to kill a 300lb man with no tolerance built up.

I wonder if legalizing weaned rehab would help. Like say cutting their dose by 25% repeatedly.

On a related note I wonder what role genetics play with it. It would be nice if susceptibility could be read from a genetic test so they could say "Don't worry about restricting opiates for him - he'll get weakened and would always want to get off them asap anyway but he shouldn't drink alcohol when stressed or take cough syrup but should avoid stimulants for their personal addictive potential."

I know personally from legitimate medical usage there are high potential for abuse drugs that for me have me wondering how anyone could consider it fun.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#307

Post by 3131s » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 1:48 PM UTC

ta1234567890 wrote: post #283

3131s wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> vary wildly between countries Not really, name a European country where I won't be jailed for having even an ounce of cocaine? Portugal is as close as it gets to sensible drug policy, and they've only decriminalized (as opposed to legalized) small personal-use amounts. The only drugs that should be regulated are antibiotics :)

> Not really, name a European country where I won't be jailed for having even an ounce of cocaine? Spain. A couple of years ago I was in Madrid and went out to a bar with some friends. One of them tells me to come outside with him, then he proceeds to prepare some cocaine lines on the roof of a random car parked on the street right outside the bar. When he's about to snort them, some normal looking guys approach us (…

For an ounce though? I picked that amount because it's not a lot, but it is generally considered to be more than a "personal use" amount.

You're best bet in the US getting caught with that much or more is to just get robbed by the cops, which actually happens all the time.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#308

Post by justaguyhere » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 1:51 PM UTC

doktrin wrote: post #233

flukus wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very US centric view but the war on drugs is very international. Cannabis is illegal in most of the world where Americas race relations simply aren't issues, so I really don't buy into this reasoning. This is good old moral superiority at work.

The US has unquestionably played an outsized role in shaping international drug policy over the last 100 years. I'm also pretty sure that the 'war on drugs' is a uniquely American phrase, and if it isn't it was certainly coined and popularised there.

"war on >" is uniquely American, examples include drugs, obesity, poverty etc. I've never heard this phrase used elsewhere. Why everything needs to be a "war", I don't understand

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#309

Post by peterwwillis » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 1:56 PM UTC

anoncoward111 wrote: post #257

peterwwillis wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is this "they" you speak of? The citizens elected to govern? Or a shadowy cabal of unknown entities working in secret toward some ominous cause that ends in you being forced to do everything you don't want to do? Honestly, follow any "we're all screwed our government sucks" logic train to its conclusion and you hit one of two conclusions: A) oh shit, it's actually my fault along with everyone else's that we're in…

"They" refers to anyone who is quite rich and or powerful, and actively uses those resources against others. So when you start to wonder, "hmm, I wonder why housing is so expensive relative to my income", or, "hmm, I wonder why that policeman gave me a $400 ticket for 'speeding'", or, "hmm, I wonder why those federal agents are killing children in Waco", or, "hmm, I wonder why no bankers went to jail for fraudulent m…

Uh, no, I'm not suggesting we elect people to make bad things happen. I'm saying we elect people to make bad things illegal.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#310

Post by rtkwe » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 2:08 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #91

jeffdavis wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that a broad reading? Under what reasonable interpretation of the Constitution does the federal government have the power to tell you not to grow plants on your own property for your own consumption?

The same law that’s been used to prosecute other crimes, the federal govt jurisdiction over interstate commerce. That decision goes back to federal govt controls over wheat prices. Some guy said “i’ll grow what I want, I don’t care about the price controls” and the courts agreed with the twisted logic that it impact interstate commerce, thus they have the power to control it.

The logic in that case isn't really that twisted. One single guy growing more than allowed for personal use won't move the market but if the court ruled in his favor anyone would be able to do the same which would reduce the demand for wheat. If the government has the authority to regulate price controls at the national level control of all supply is kind of required.